Meeting started by ara at 15:02:41 UTC. The full logs are available at http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2011/ubuntu-meeting.2011-09-19-15.02.log.html .
- Feedback priorities
LINK: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuFriendly/Tools/Checkbox/Feedback (ara, 15:04:26) LINK: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuFriendly/Tools/Checkbox/Feedback (ara, 15:05:26) LINK: http://launchpad.net/bugs/283929 (brendand, 15:17:33)
Ubuntu Friendly website: http://bit.ly/UbuntuFriendly
- Any Other Business?
Meeting ended at 16:07:45 UTC.
People present (lines said)
- ara (145)
- victorp (75)
- brendand (33)
- roadmr (31)
- bladernr (26)
- akgraner (4)
- ubottu (3)
- meetingology (3)
- jedimike (3)
15:02:41 <ara> #startmeeting
15:02:41 <meetingology> Available commands: #accept #accepted #action #agree #agreed #chair #commands #endmeeting #endvote #halp #help #idea #info #link #lurk #meetingname #meetingtopic #nick #progress #rejected #replay #restrictlogs #save #startmeeting #subtopic #topic #unchair #undo #unlurk #vote #voters #votesrequired
15:03:00 <ara> Agenda:
15:03:08 <ara> Feedback priorities
15:03:08 <ara> AOB
15:03:21 <ara> #topic Feedback priorities
15:03:47 <ara> First of all, thanks to all that provided feedback
15:04:13 <ara> I am sure I missed some of the points, so let's try to cover what we have and add more if we can remember some more
15:04:25 <ara> the list so far is at:
15:04:37 <ara> We are the final sprint for Oneiric and we have to be careful to make the best decisions. For the feedback that we are receiving for UF there let's try to come up with a solution for each of it.
15:04:51 <ara> Possible solutions
15:04:52 <ara> * 0.12.8
15:04:52 <ara> * PPA
15:04:52 <ara> * Won't Fix
15:04:52 <ara> * Remove test
15:05:08 <ara> 0.12.8 is due in a couple of weeks and it will probably be the last checkbox release in Oneiric, PPA is the rewrite of checkbox that we are developing and that will be released as a PPA, Won't Fix and Remove test are clear enough
15:05:26 <ara> #link https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuFriendly/Tools/Checkbox/Feedback
15:05:54 <ara> So, going one by one
15:06:00 <ara> 1. Superuser warning should appear at the beginning
15:06:15 <roadmr> o/
15:06:22 <ara> roadmr, go ahead
15:06:52 <roadmr> there's currently a known bug in checkbox where it skips the welcome and test selection screens, goes directly into the tests
15:07:13 <brendand> o/
15:07:17 <ara> roadmr, can we have the bug number, please?
15:07:19 <roadmr> this exacerbates the problem observed, once the bug is fixed, we could add the warning in the welcome screen's text
15:07:30 <roadmr> sure: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/852204
15:07:31 <ubottu> Ubuntu bug 852204 in checkbox "Test selection screen does not appear" [Undecided,Confirmed]
15:07:32 <roadmr> ..
15:08:06 <ara> brendand,
15:08:54 <brendand> i don't think this should be a high priority. you could argue that putting it before the welcome screen would be more confusing
15:08:56 <brendand> ..
15:09:15 <ara> o/
15:09:28 <ara> brendand, yes, I think the real problem is the bug for the welcome screen, not the message
15:09:44 <ara> so I think the solution would be to fix that bug for 0.12.8
15:09:59 <ara> ..
15:10:26 <brendand> definitely
15:10:29 <victorp> o/
15:10:37 <ara> victorp, go ahead
15:10:43 <victorp> can we triage that bug
15:10:49 <ara> victorp, I just did
15:10:56 <victorp> hehe ...
15:11:19 <ara> cool, one off
15:11:28 <ara> 2. mem_test is crashing for many users
15:11:44 <ara> The value of this test is very arguable
15:12:14 <ara> my suggestion would be to raise a bug about it and to remove the test
15:12:24 <victorp> bug - https://bugs.launchpad.net/checkbox/+bug/853799
15:12:26 <ubottu> Ubuntu bug 853799 in checkbox "remove memory test from ubuntu friendly whitelist (default)" [Critical,Confirmed]
15:12:30 <brendand> o/
15:12:45 <ara> victorp, thanks
15:12:47 <ara> brendand,
15:13:46 <brendand> i think there is value in checking if the RAM in the system is usable but i don't think this test is going about it in a way that suits the needs of the ubuntu friendly program
15:14:26 <brendand> removing it is an okay short term solution though
15:14:28 <brendand> ...
15:14:45 <ara> brendand, cool, milestoned as well, thanks
15:14:59 <ara> Moving to the next one
15:15:07 <ara> 3. when a test moves from interactive to non-interactive, the test information should be updated.
15:15:16 <ara> I am sure that there is a old bug about this
15:15:35 <ara> did anyone try to find it?
15:16:14 <roadmr> o/
15:16:23 <ara> roadmr, you go
15:16:32 <brendand> o/
15:16:35 <roadmr> The bug doesn't ring a bell, though we'd have to go look at old bugs, there aren't that many so if it's there we should find it
15:16:53 <roadmr> We do need to improve our progress indication when non-interactive tests are running
15:17:09 <roadmr> we'd have to look at the amount of work (mainly in the gtk interface) to make this less confusing
15:17:12 <roadmr> ..
15:17:18 <ara> thanks
15:17:22 <ara> brendand, your turn
15:17:22 <victorp> o/
15:17:32 <brendand> nearly 3 years old to be precise...
15:17:33 <brendand> http://launchpad.net/bugs/283929
15:17:34 <ubottu> Ubuntu bug 283929 in checkbox "Answer from previous question is shown while automated tests are run" [Low,Triaged]
15:18:01 <brendand> ..
15:18:14 <ara> brendand, thanks!
15:18:17 <ara> victorp, you go now
15:18:53 <victorp> seems that this is a gui thing... if we are going to rewrite the UI seems better to fix it then
15:19:01 <brendand> o/
15:19:03 <victorp> unless is a blocker
15:19:05 <victorp> ..
15:19:22 <ara> I don't think it is a blocker, I would vote to fix it in the PPA
15:19:26 <ara> brendand 15:20:05 * victorp wonders if we can create a milestone for that
15:20:09 <akgraner> o/
15:20:15 <brendand> i'd say PPA too. the controls are disabled while the automated test is running so even if it is confusing, there's no scope for the user to do anything wrong.
15:20:16 <brendand> ...
15:20:32 <ara> akgraner, you go
15:20:51 <akgraner> If you fix it in a ppa will end users know how to update easily?
15:21:23 <akgraner> I don't use PPA that much
15:21:24 <akgraner> ...
15:21:27 <ara> o/
15:21:39 <victorp> ara - can we stop calling it a ppa and say 12.04 instead
15:21:45 <victorp> oops o/
15:22:08 <victorp> ..
15:22:09 <ara> The so-called ppa is intended to be a "nicer" checkbox that will be released in P
15:22:30 <ara> so, yes, we can call it something else
15:22:32 <ara> ..
15:22:43 <ara> (not sure if 12.04 is the best way to call it, though)
15:24:24 <ara> akgraner, the default checkbox will be usable and we will let people know how to upgrade if the want to use the fancy one
15:24:27 <ara> ..
15:24:43 <ara> next one
15:24:49 <ara> 4. graphics/resolution test failed with a dual monitor set up
15:25:07 <brendand> o/
15:25:13 <ara> brendand, go ahead
15:25:25 <brendand> is there a bug? has anyone confirmed this?
15:25:32 <brendand> ...
15:25:53 <ara> brendand, this is coming from Carlos, but I am not sure if he raised a bug
15:26:13 <ara> so the first action here would be to confirm it and raise a bug
15:26:47 <ara> but if we confirm it I would vote to fix it in Oneiric
15:26:48 <victorp> o/
15:26:52 <ara> victorp, go
15:27:07 <victorp> I would think then as Carlos to do so and move on
15:27:09 <victorp> ..
15:27:14 <brendand> o/
15:27:18 <victorp> s/as/ask/
15:27:19 <ara> brendand
15:27:43 <brendand> i did just check and it is confirmable (you get two lines with an * instead of one)
15:28:00 <brendand> as victorp said, ping hggdh to raise a bug and then deal with it
15:28:13 <brendand> which i think should be in 0.12.8
15:28:33 <brendand> since i imagine a lot of people will run with a display connected
15:28:36 <brendand> ...
15:28:44 <ara> OK, let's do that then
15:28:46 <ara> Next one
15:28:48 <ara> 5. suspend/resume should warn the user that it might fail
15:29:19 <ara> I think the test already warns the user, doesn't it?
15:29:28 <brendand> o/
15:29:37 <roadmr> o/
15:30:02 <ara> brendand, go
15:30:18 <brendand> i don't think so 15:30:20 * brendand checks
15:30:31 <ara> roadmr, ?
15:30:42 <roadmr> from the test description: "If your system fails to wake at all and must be rebooted,
15:30:45 <roadmr> restart System Testing after reboot and mark this test as Failed."
15:30:52 <brendand> a little bit. could be clearer
15:31:12 <roadmr> yep, not sure how changing a test description at this point affects things. Well that's all I had on this test.
15:31:15 <roadmr> ..
15:31:38 <ara> o/
15:31:45 <bladernr> o/
15:31:45 <ara> I think for Oneiric is good enough
15:31:48 <ara> ..
15:31:49 <ara> bladernr, go
15:32:16 <bladernr> was just going to say that changing the actual test descriptions would require a translation change, and thus an exception pushed through at this point...
15:32:22 <bladernr> at least that's my understanding of it
15:32:22 <bladernr> ...
15:32:43 <ara> o/
15:32:47 <ara> Yes I think that's the case
15:33:00 <ara> I think we can mark this one as "won't fix"
15:33:04 <ara> ..
15:33:40 <ara> Cool, next one
15:33:43 <ara> 6. ftp test is not working
15:33:51 <victorp> o/
15:33:57 <ara> victorp, go ahead
15:34:03 <victorp> ftp test!!! realy?
15:34:09 <victorp> really I meant
15:34:24 <victorp> I dont really sure what this tells us about the system
15:34:31 <victorp> I say remove it
15:34:33 <victorp> ..
15:34:36 <ara> +1
15:34:59 <roadmr> +1 on killing ftp test
15:35:04 <bladernr> +1
15:35:08 <brendand> +1
15:35:36 <ara> Cool, I will raise a bug and will milestone it for 0.12.8
15:35:43 <ara> 7. Some testing that I do not have hardware for like PCMCIA are still being asked for
15:35:50 <roadmr> o/
15:36:30 <ara> roadmr, go ahead
15:36:55 <roadmr> I don't recall what the agreement was on this, but I think we can't detect pcmcia so we have to ask for it. We could phrase it as "does your system have pcmcia?" instead of what we have now, which leaves the impression we are asking for stuff the system doesn't have
15:37:22 <roadmr> in general we should make sure we don't ask for hardware we can otherwise detect, but if we can't detect it, asking is better than just doing nothing.
15:37:25 <roadmr> ..
15:37:40 <ara> o/
15:37:43 <bladernr> o/
15:38:04 <ara> I think this can be deferred for checkbox gui rewrite
15:38:05 <ara> ..
15:38:07 <ara> bladernr, your turn
15:39:07 <bladernr> let me conflate a couple things... I think you suggested marking hte suspend test description change as wont fix, i'd suggest postponing that one and this one for P and handle it then (or not)
15:39:24 <bladernr> but both seem to be useful changes, but probably not achievable for Oneiric...
15:39:41 <bladernr> however, I'd like to make sure both live so we don't forget them for P
15:39:42 <bladernr> ..
15:39:52 <ara> sounds good to me
15:39:52 <victorp> +1
15:40:31 <ara> Cool, next one
15:40:34 <ara> 8. USB storage transfer takes forever
15:40:43 <victorp> o/
15:40:47 <ara> victorp, go ahead
15:41:05 <victorp> maybe that was just me? has anyone else experience the same ? akgraner?
15:41:06 <victorp> ..
15:41:32 <bladernr> o/
15:41:38 <ara> bladernr, go
15:41:47 <bladernr> is that the automated USB storage transfer test?
15:42:13 <bladernr> if so, it takes a while because it creates an arbitrarily big file to transfer to usb storage and then checksums it to compare with the copy on hard disk...
15:42:43 <bladernr> the file size could be made smaller, thus significantly speeding up the test... the file size was purely arbitrary
15:42:44 <bladernr> ..
15:42:51 <ara> o/
15:43:20 <ara> then I vote to fix it (make it smaller) for P, but I don't see a very high value in fixing it for Oneiric at this point
15:43:21 <ara> ..
15:43:42 <brendand> o/
15:43:48 <ara> brendand, yes?
15:44:03 <brendand> i think that's some pretty tasty low-hanging fruit
15:44:11 <victorp> 0/
15:44:13 <victorp> o
15:44:13 <brendand> am i right bladernr?
15:44:20 <brendand> ...
15:44:30 <ara> victorp, go
15:44:44 <bladernr> +1 brendand
15:45:07 <victorp> 5 minutes out of 15-20 minutes run seems pretty bad to me and worth doing if just it requires changing a magic number
15:45:35 <victorp> plus the file shouldn't be bigger that 1K if we are checking crc here, I dont think size matters
15:45:36 <victorp> ..
15:46:01 <bladernr> that's what she said
15:46:02 <victorp> s/that/than/
15:46:08 <bladernr> o/
15:46:17 <victorp> no
15:46:25 <victorp> she said fixit for P I am saying O
15:46:34 <ara> bladernr, go ahead
15:47:05 <victorp> o/
15:47:19 <bladernr> A: nevermind, bad joke... as for the magic number, it's a very easy fix as brendan said, so +1 for fixing on 0. The default is 32mb, so we could definintely make the default smaller (1MB or 1K or 100K or whatever)
15:47:21 <bladernr> ..
15:47:34 <bladernr> er... O not 0
15:47:50 <ara> my only concern is that they'll accept it or not
15:47:57 <ara> victorp, go ahead
15:48:00 <victorp> I vote for milestoning thisfor 0.12.8 15:48:14 * victorp gets the bad joke now... really bad
15:48:35 <victorp> ara- why would they accept the other fixes (mem test) and not this one?
15:48:52 <victorp> ..
15:49:01 <ara> victorp, I don't know, in this case we are changing a test, in the other case we are removing it
15:49:19 <ara> but I am happy to try
15:49:19 <victorp> ah, well we should ask in any case
15:49:50 <ara> cool
15:49:55 <ara> next one 15:49:57 * victorp ..
15:50:11 <ara> last one
15:50:22 <ara> 9. Submitting results is not clear
15:50:29 <ara> this is a problem by itself
15:50:40 <victorp> o/
15:50:47 <ara> if you leave that blank it won't accept the submission (unless something changed in between)
15:50:48 <ara> ..
15:50:50 <ara> victorp, ?
15:50:58 <victorp> I must say that is "submitting results with you LP id" is not clear
15:51:00 <victorp> ..
15:51:17 <ara> but if you leave it blank? does it submit?
15:51:22 <roadmr> o/
15:51:22 <victorp> anonymous submissions? 15:51:43 * victorp has not tried that
15:51:49 <ara> roadmr, go ahead
15:52:04 <roadmr> If you don't enter an email address, a dialog says "not submitting to launchpad" and you end up in the "successfully finished testing!" screen
15:52:16 <roadmr> if you then press "previous" and do enter an email address, it can submit to launchpad
15:52:27 <ara> roadmr, but if you leave it blank it won't submit
15:52:32 <roadmr> I agree that the UI/sequence is a bit confusing, but it works and it does warn you that it won't submit if left blank
15:52:37 <ara> which it was my point
15:52:42 <victorp> o/
15:52:43 <ara> we should accept blank emails
15:52:46 <ara> victorp, yes
15:52:56 <roadmr> ok ok, if that's the idea then we do need some changes :0
15:52:58 <roadmr> ..
15:53:13 <victorp> a simple solution would be to put in the test box by default [enter your email here]
15:53:27 <victorp> s/test/text/ !!!
15:53:32 <victorp> what is up with me today
15:53:33 <victorp> ..
15:53:42 <ara> o/
15:53:56 <ara> but what should we do with blank emails?
15:53:56 <ara> ..
15:53:57 <victorp> go ahead ara
15:54:09 <victorp> o/
15:54:21 <ara> victorp, just go if nobody is talking
15:54:36 <victorp> I am +1 on anonymous submissions unless we see most people are using it
15:54:39 <roadmr> o/
15:54:52 <ara> roadmr, yup
15:54:57 <victorp> so what am I saying is go ahead with accepting it and introduce a ban on them later on
15:54:58 <victorp> ..
15:55:10 <roadmr> one very simple solution would be forcing a "dummy" email address for blank submissions
15:55:39 <roadmr> so if it's blank, checkbox sends it as if coming from email@example.com, and we know that all submissions from that address were anonymously sent
15:55:39 <victorp> firstname.lastname@example.org
15:55:43 <roadmr> ..
15:56:04 <ara> +1
15:56:20 <victorp> o/
15:56:26 <ara> victorp, yes?
15:56:34 <victorp> is that doable for 0.12.8 or shall we leave it to P?
15:56:39 <victorp> ..
15:57:09 <ara> o/
15:57:25 <ara> I think it is quite a bit change, I am afraid
15:57:32 <ara> ..
15:57:50 <victorp> o/
15:57:56 <victorp> I would say do it in P
15:58:02 <bladernr> o/
15:58:04 <victorp> we dont seem to have a lack of submissions
15:58:26 <victorp> there is 48 for oneiric at the moment
15:58:28 <victorp> ..
15:58:31 <ara> bladernr, yes?
15:59:04 <bladernr> to avoid trying to work this into checkbox for O, would it be possible to do that server-side instead of the client side?
15:59:05 <bladernr> ..
15:59:29 <ara> bladernr, the UI won't submit without email
15:59:43 <ara> I would say, do it in P
15:59:44 <ara> ..
16:00:00 <bladernr> ahhh... I thought that may have changed for anonymous subs...
16:00:07 <bladernr> ..
16:00:30 <ara> Cool, I think this covers the first topic
16:00:39 <ara> Moving on quickly (we are already out of time)
16:00:58 <ara> #topic Ubuntu Friendly website: http://bit.ly/UbuntuFriendly
16:01:14 <ara> victorp has suggested to cover this topic during this meeting
16:01:25 <ara> victorp, anything you want to mention specifically?
16:01:28 <victorp> o?
16:01:31 <victorp> I like it!
16:01:33 <victorp> ..
16:01:41 <jedimike> o/
16:01:46 <ara> jedimike, go!
16:01:49 <jedimike> i like it too
16:01:50 <jedimike> .. 16:01:53 * victorp thinks jedimike and cr3 are doing a great job
16:02:25 * ara likes it as well
16:03:07 <ara> anyway, just a reminder that feedback and bugs (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-friendly) are more than welcome
16:03:12 <victorp> Any one has contrustive feedback , please?
16:03:34 <victorp> ara - can you set up answers in there
16:03:42 <ara> victorp, sure
16:04:01 <ara> done
16:04:04 <roadmr> other than polishing things (the search controls on the left) I'd say it's looking very nice so far
16:04:06 <victorp> I think that will be useful to things like this, rather than bugs
16:05:23 <ara> #topic Any Other Business?
16:05:27 <victorp> akgraner, have you had time to look at it?
16:06:16 <ara> going once...
16:06:42 <ara> going twice...
16:07:42 <ara> gone!
16:07:45 <ara> #endmeeting